Category Archives: blog

blog, diversity, news, politics, race

Go vote, then check out this election eve poll of Asian Americans.

I was wrong on the San Francisco Giants. It was Giants in 4, not 7. But will the Giants be wrong in predicting today’s election? Check out how the home team’s state determines the winner in the presidential race nearly 90 percent of the time on my post at www.aaldef.org/blog.

ELECTION EVE POLL

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund along with the Natioanl Asian Pacific American Coalition for Community Development (CAPACD) conducted a national pre-election day poll. The significance of the poll is that it confirms previous snapshots of the national Asian American community.

We’ve got issues.

This is taken from the AALDEF press release with some added commentary  from me.

* Key concerns: The vast majority of Asian American voters (58%) said that fixing the economy and creating more jobs was the most important issue that politicians should address. Health care and education reform were each cited by 20% of Asian American voters as the most important issue, followed by civil rights/immigration issues (13%).

This snapshot appears to be in line with previous surveys done this campaign season.

 * Political affiliation. Although a large proportion of Asian Americans describe themselves as independent (29%), 41% of Asian Americans are Democrats and 14% of Asian Americans are Republicans.

Confirms the growing independence of Asian Americans, and how the group can no longer be taken for granted and must be addressed by all parties.

* First-time voters.  One in five survey respondents (20%) were first-time voters in the 2012 elections. These Asian Americans are seldom included in mainstream polls. 45% of this group have already voted in states with early voting.

A good reason not to pay too much attention to mainstream exit polls. They’ll never be able to tell you anything about Asian Americans.

 * Voter contacts. Despite their growing interest in the 2012 elections, a majority (51%) of Asian Americans said they were never contacted by a campaign, political party, or community group to register to vote or to vote. Among the 40% who were approached to vote in today’s election, 55% of Asian Americans were contacted by Democratic representatives, 38% by Republicans, and 32% by community organizations.

This I found to be the most startling group of facts. Half of the sample says they were never contacted at all? Where’s the outreach? The outrage?

* Health care. 60% of Asian American voters supported the federal government’s role in ensuring access to health insurance, compared to 23% who believe that people should secure their own health insurance.

I wonder how all the Asian American doctors saw this issue?

* Budget deficit. To address the national budget deficit, 45% of Asian Americans supported a combination of tax increases and spending cuts, with 26% stating that taxes on the wealthy should be increased. Only 14% of Asian Americans supported spending cuts alone to reduce the deficit.

Considering that Asian Americans have the highest per capita income in the country, this is a potentially more meaningful finding. Suggests a sense of tax fairness in the group.

 * Immigration reform. 57% of Asian American voters supported comprehensive immigration reform, with a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently in the United States. This support was much higher among U.S. born Asian American citizens (73%), compared to foreign-born Asian American citizens (50%).

This could signify a real divide among native and foreign born Asian Americans. How to interpret it is tricky. 

That more U.S. born want reform isn’t so clear. They believe in rule of law? Are they holdovers from the civil rights era? Or maybe they just want all their relatives here? 

And why wouldn’t more foreign born citizens want a pathway to citizenship? Could it be the just don’t care for more competition from new immigrants? Sounds like they’ve  politically morphed into a Southern White male.

*Undocumented youth. 35% of Asian Americans said they were more enthusiastic about President Obama because of his new policy to stop the deportation of undocumented youth who attended college or served in the military (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). 40% of Asian Americans said their vote was not affected by this policy directive, and nearly half (49%) of Asian American voters aged 18 to 30 were more enthusiastic about Obama after he announced the new policy in June 2012.

 This is the future of Asian America. What they think matters.

* News sources. In describing their main source of news about politics and community issues, 41% of Asian Americans got their news from television; 30% from the internet; 16% from newspapers, and 7% from radio. Among specific ethnic groups, a large proportion of Vietnamese American (45%), Chinese American (40%) and Korean American (36%) voters said that Asian-language ethnic media provided their main source of news.

Sad that newspapers’ decline is evidenced here too. Watch for declines in TV as well, as everything switches over to the web.

AALDEF will be coming up with more the day after election.

Meanwhile the polls are about to close in some states.

But don’t let that deter you westward Asian Americans. Your vote matters. Always. Still.

 (Check out AALDEF’s official press release on the poll)

 

 

 

 

blog, news, politics

Winner? Obama by TKO, but Romney still strong

President Barack Obama seemed to finally figure out what to do in a debate—to assert and negate, in essence to clash and cross swords with Governor Mitt Romney on any issue on the table.

As a result, the second debate was far from the steamroller for Romney as in the first debate.

I expected the town hall format to be a tad more folksy and interactive. But the crowd of undecided voters assembled at Hofstra University were just props in the middle of a real fight between Obama and Romney. Both came out ready, asserting and countering even outside the rigid debate format. It created a challenge for the moderator Candy Crowley, who did an admirable job keeping decorum and keeping the debaters on point, at one time correcting Romney on Obama’s response on Libya, the feistiest moment of the debate.

But to me, while Romney seemed to be level with his last performance, the president’s more energized approach left the lasting overall impression that his performance on this night was greater than Romney’s—maybe even enough to erase the memory of the president’s  first debate lapse. Perhaps for his base. As for undecideds, that’s not so clear.

From the very first question, the style and substance of both was apparent. To the Adelphi student who asked if he would have a job on graduation, Romney had the empathy, but no real plan. Obama came out with an answer that was like a microscosm of the whole debate, including the goal of creaing high-paying manufacturing jobs, a jab in about Romney’s Detroit stand,  tax code revisions, business incentives, energy plans.

In the same two-minute answer, Obama scored his highest response from CNN focus group members with this line:

“We got to make sure we have the best education system in the world, and the fact that you’re going to college is great. But I want everybody to have a great education and we’ve worked hard that student loans are available for folks like you.”

The only negatives for me in the debate came when the combatants crossed the line, turning the civility of parry and riposte into a street brawl. I kept wondering if any of this was scoring with the demographic of choice in this campaign, women.

There were times Obama was clearly getting under Romney’s skin. One point Romney turned to engage Obama on an issue, but instead of taking the bait, the president merely looked at Romney and said in a dismissive tone, “Go on.”

That’s the way to use your status.

Other issues: Romney tried to attack Obama on immigration. But Romney had no response when Obama pointed out that Romney’s key immigration advisor is the author of Arizona’s “Show me your papers” law.

Still, I didn’t see any real knockout blow in this debate. Overall, I’d say Obama won on points in O/R II.

But because Obama played rope-a-dope in O/R I , the race is still closer than it should be.

blog

To all you Mittwagoners: Romney was good on camera in the first presidential debate, but what about the hidden camera truth?

I’d love to have a hidden camera on Romney this morning to see how he’s reacting to his performance last night.

Do you think he’s high-fiving Ann? 

Last night was showbiz for Romney. Make no mistake it was a performance, and he was on his game. But was it the truth, the real Romney?

Re-watching parts of the debate this morning, it’s amazing how Obama didn’t seem to have a sense of what game he was playing, as if he were waiting for Romney to be deferential. Debates are about clash, contrasts, and Obama didn’t engage sharply enough. He acted like it was a photo op and not a debate.

Debates are also evanescent, real time events. You’VE got to call your opponent on the spot and press. You can’t rely on fact-checking later to get back. It’s all face value, because the bond with viewer/voters is made emotionally on the impression you give off. So as a debater, you’re either there or you’re not. And Obama wasn’t there. Romney was.

I had mentioned that affirmative action could have been an issue that would speak to Asian Americans. And there were chances to sneak in a line or two about that in the “role of government” section. But there was very little time for that, or for other key domestic issues like abortion, women’s rights, immigrant rights. Obama could have mentioned the 47 percent to sharply contrast where Romney stands on the role of government. Instead, Romney was able to sound like he’s a compassionate supporter of the middle income voter. Laughable, but that’s what happens when the  moderator loses control of the debate and allows the debaters to go at it. In a tightly scripted format where moderators contribution is to say “Time!” a looser conversation can seem  good. But this one got a little out of hand, as Romney took control.

If you saw Romney debate and liked him, just make sure you replay in your head that 47 percent tape. Remember that’s the real Romney. That’s what Romney really thinks. Romney isn’t the prefab Romney. The Romney in the 47 percent tape didn’t show up last night, because the cameras weren’t hidden.

That’s why you can’t trust any favorable impression he may have given last night. We didn’t get the hidden camera truth. When the stakes are this high, it’s the only thing you can trust.

blog

Who won that first Obama-Romney debate?

When it comes to debates, format is everything. Sometimes it’s too tight. Sometimes it’s too loose.

Wednesday’s was just right—for Mitt Romney. But it was wrong for President Obama, who never seemed to find the oratorical magic to take over.  

Indeed, it was Romney who seemed to be comfortable and in control of this “wonk-fest,” perhaps due to all the debates the Republicans did in the primary season.

Now as for the facts?

In some ways, the facts don’t matter in debates. Reality check all you want, only a bald face lie is a negative. Debates are  made for an etch-a-sketch guy like Romney. They’re not made for the deliberate orator like Obama.  Debates really are all about style and confidence and how a candidate thinks on his feet.  It’s the whole persuasive package, not a matter of accuracy.  So the key question to ask is who looked energized and engaged in his answers? Who looked presidential? Who looked like he wanted to be the next president? Who listened as well as they spoke so they could pounce, deflect, retort appropriately.

In that sense, I think Obama looked like he mailed it in.  He acted like a politician with a lead. He didn’t go for some of the things that he personally needed to ask Romney directly.  If he is your surrogate, you want him to ask Romney about “that tape,” that 47 percent comment, the tax-return  issue, Bain capital. Where were questions on those issues?

Romney acted like a man back on his heels who had to do well. He’s not Thurston Howell III. He’s the underdog overdog. He needed a positive campaign experience and the first debate I think gave that to him.

Did it change undecided voters? I don’t think so. There was nothing that changed anything. Romney on Wednesday night is the same guy he was last week and the week before. Not a good candidate, not exactly the man to be president. So he had one good night at the first debate. Is that really enough to jump on the Mittwagon?

CNN’s flash poll of registered voters, 67 percent said Romney won. Only 25 percent said Obama won. If Romney wins the election , this debate will be a turning point. If he loses, then you’ll know that one debate victory is not enough.

Also see my pre-debate comments on the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund blog.